I'm sure most of this group has seen the information put out by NIST
regarding the changes to the WWVB format. But, for those who may not
yet have seen this, here's a link to it:
See:
http://www.nist.gov/calibrations/upload/1424.pdf
Re. GPS traceable to NIST.
- Original Message -
From: Burt I. Weiner b...@att.net
To: time-nuts@febo.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2012 11:49 AM
Subject: [time-nuts] New WWVB format...
I'm sure most of this group has seen
, September 26, 2012 11:49 AM
To: time-nuts@febo.com
Subject: [time-nuts] New WWVB format...
I'm sure most of this group has seen the information put out by NIST
regarding the changes to the WWVB format. But, for those who may not
yet have seen this, here's a link to it:
http://f1.grp.yahoofs.com/v1
- Original Message -
From: Burt I. Weiner b...@att.net
To: time-nuts@febo.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2012 8:49 AM
Subject: [time-nuts] New WWVB format...
I'm sure most of this group has seen the information put out by NIST
regarding the changes to the WWVB format. But, for those who may
WWVB format...
See:
http://www.nist.gov/calibrations/upload/1424.pdf
Re. GPS traceable to NIST.
- Original Message -
From: Burt I. Weiner b...@att.net
To: time-nuts@febo.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2012 11:49 AM
Subject: [time-nuts] New WWVB format...
I'm sure most
the G2G (GPS to GOES) translator worked. Extra
credit for adding back the 45 degree hourly phase shift.
/tvb
- Original Message -
From: Burt I. Weiner b...@att.net
To: time-nuts@febo.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2012 8:49 AM
Subject: [time-nuts] New WWVB format...
I'm sure most
-
From: Burt I. Weiner b...@att.net
To: time-nuts@febo.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2012 8:49 AM
Subject: [time-nuts] New WWVB format...
I'm sure most of this group has seen the information put out by NIST
regarding the changes to the WWVB format. But, for those who may not
yet have seen
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 10:13:22AM -0700, Tom Van Baak wrote:
My reading of the document(s) is that the new format will in fact allow
WWVB to be used as a frequency standard with even greater precision then
before, though not with unmodified legacy WWVB carrier receivers. My hope
is that
DSP would be good, although I also think an microcontroller
implementation could be interesting. Atmel's ARM MCUs look like they'd
be good candidates for this sort of thing.
The first stepis to simply use a regular PC, maybe running Linux.
This is the easiest and fastest platform to
This is a job for Raspberry Pi...
Don
Majdi S. Abbas
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 10:13:22AM -0700, Tom Van Baak wrote:
My reading of the document(s) is that the new format will in fact
allow
WWVB to be used as a frequency standard with even greater precision
then
before, though not with
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 11:38:10AM -0700, Chris Albertson wrote:
The first stepis to simply use a regular PC, maybe running Linux.
This is the easiest and fastest platform to develop on. It gets
harder and takes longer if you use a smaller and more esoteric
platform like a DSP or FPGA. Using
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 11:59 AM, Majdi S. Abbas m...@latt.net wrote:
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 11:38:10AM -0700, Chris Albertson wrote:
The first stepis to simply use a regular PC, maybe running Linux.
This is the easiest and fastest platform to develop on. It gets
harder and takes longer if
On 26 Sep, 2012, at 11:19 , Majdi S. Abbas wrote:
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 10:13:22AM -0700, Tom Van Baak wrote:
My reading of the document(s) is that the new format will in fact allow
WWVB to be used as a frequency standard with even greater precision then
before, though not with
Might be a bit of a cost. The SDR runs $1495.
Regards
Paul
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 5:36 PM, Dennis Ferguson
dennis.c.fergu...@gmail.com wrote:
On 26 Sep, 2012, at 11:19 , Majdi S. Abbas wrote:
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 10:13:22AM -0700, Tom Van Baak wrote:
My reading of the document(s) is
On 26 Sep, 2012, at 14:43 , paul swed wrote:
Might be a bit of a cost. The SDR runs $1495.
Regards
Paul
The ones with the clock input options (the SDR-IP
and the NetSDR, I think) are significantly more than
that. But they are also huge overkill if all you want is
a digital LF receiver.
Hmmm SDR. Does that mean spensive darn radio?
Joking aside its clearly massive overkill.
The rf front end is very reasonable and 3-4 stages of opamps like the TL08X
class will do a very fine job and you can even use stages as active
bandpass filters etc. Have built a few over the last 6 months.
On 09/26/2012 07:13 PM, Tom Van Baak wrote:
For those of you who don't dare click on encrypted Yahoo URL's, the original
NIST link is:
http://www.nist.gov/pml/div688/grp40/upload/NIST-Enhanced-WWVB-Broadcast-Format-sept-2012-Radio-Station-staff.pdf
Burt,
My reading of the document(s) is that
17 matches
Mail list logo
